History
Pollution of our planet reached such a dire stage in the late 1960s that Lake Erie was declared “dead” and the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland caught on fire. The 1970s saw the creation or expansion of most of the environmental laws we have today :
- The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 1969
- The Environmental Protection Act 1970
- The Clean Air Act greatly expanded in 1970
- The Endangered Species Act 1973
Note: All of these regulations have received pushback over the years. During the previous administration, many of these laws and regulations were gutted by Executive Order.
In the 1980s, after the Bhopal, Chernobyl, and the Exxon Valdez disasters, more vigorous environmental activism efforts caused Americans to call for “greener” products. Meaning they wanted corporations to be conscious of the environment. Instead, corporate environmentalism was born. Sophisticated in messaging and more frequent in greenwash advertising (Karliner, 2001), “Corporate Environmentalism” is the recognition by our multi-national companies that it is a profitable business to add a “veneer of green” to their products and activities.
What is Greenwashing?
Greenwashing is accepted as the “practice of making unwarranted or overblown claims of sustainability or environmental friendliness in an attempt to gain market share” or become socially accepted. It is making something that pollutes appear clean, just as the BP logo suddenly became a flower.
Some companies intend to capitalize on the growing demand for environmentally sound products purposely. Some to the degree of putting out press releases and “commercials touting their clean energy or pollution reduction efforts.” When in reality, the commitment to green is not meaningful. After all, a company can slap a ‘made from recycled material’ sticker on the box. Attempting to give the impression that they are talking about the product inside, they are only talking about the box. That company will not point the finger at the environmental disaster it is causing in producing the product. Instead, they will point at the sticker to show how they are contributing to a cleaner world. One researcher found that the companies more likely to greenwash also happen to be the dirtiest ones because they are more likely to have bad reputations (Dahl, 2010).
By definition, corporate environmentalism is tied to the outcomes of production, not to the root causes of the pollution or destruction. The notion of “sustainability” itself is dubious because, as Marv Waterstone pointed out in a recent lecture, it is “usually used as an adjective, tied to development.”
A look at the mining industry
A report titled ‘A Just Transition is a Post-extractive Transition’ by London Mining Network and War on Want states that “the mining industry is using greenwashing tactics to promote itself as part of the solution to climate change” (London Mining, 2019). They tout that they will deliver the minerals and metals needed for the growing demand for renewable energy. When all along, aside from metals like lithium, only a fraction of the minerals mined will be used in those technologies (Gia Foundation). In the process, globally, they will destroy climate-critical ecosystems, contribute to over a quarter of global carbon emissions and displace communities already vulnerable to climate change.
Why we fall for greenwashing and how not to
Proof that humanity is ready for sustainability, a worldwide Neilson study showed that 83 percent of consumers believe that companies should have an environmental program. According to A Fiji Story greenwash marketing tactics appeal to customers’ moral conscience and desires to live a green life. Some greenwashing companies do not understand that we actually want a clean world and not a sticker that plays into our psyche. As consumers, we must now also learn to decipher between advertisements that purposely deceive from the meaningful ones. The list below are some things to watch out for.
Fluffy language: Words or terms with no clear meaning (e.g. “eco-friendly”).
Green product vs. dirty company: Such as efficient lightbulbs made in a factory that pollutes rivers.
Suggestive pictures: Green images that indicate an (unjustified) green impact (e.g., flowers blooming from exhaust pipes).
Irrelevant claims: Emphasizing one tiny green attribute when everything else is not green.
Best in class: declaring the company is slightly greener than the rest, even if the rest are pretty terrible.
Just not credible: “Eco-friendly” cigarettes, anyone? “Greening” a dangerous product does not make it safe.
Jargon Information: That only a scientist could check or understand.
Imaginary friends: A“label” that looks like third-party endorsement—except that it is made up.
No proof: It could be right, but where is the evidence?
Out-right lying: Fabricated claims or data.
Resource: Understanding _Preventing_Greenwash.pdf (bsr.org)
What more can you do?
“Public outrage over corporate greenwash is more likely to induce a firm to become more open and transparent if the firm operates in an industry that is likely to have socially or environmentally damaging impacts, and if the firm is relatively well informed about its environmental, social impact.” (Dahl)
The next best thing to do is to become informed. Have conversations about greenwashing with friends and relatives. Seek out organizations that are actively working towards a better planet. Lastly, support and donate to conservation organizations.
Stay informed: Major mining companies accused of greenwashing – Environment Journal
Subscribe: PARA Newsletter
